Paramount Security Interest Holder


I copied this from someone a while back, and it makes perfect sense. Courts SILENTLY claim that the STATE is the paramount security interest holder in all property belonging to their government created franchises, JOHN DOE, JARO HENRY SMITH, etc.  So when YOU claim it instead, you force them to PROVE their silent claim, ON THE RECORD, which they’re not yet ready to do. It would implicate them in fraud.

When they don’t, your claim STANDS — And they have NO CASE. They have NO CASE because the prosecution FAILS TO STATE A CLAIM UPON WHICH RELIEF CAN BE GRANTED. This, however, might need to be asserted in PRIVATE, i.e. in judge’s chambers.

DON’T admit to being the “NAME”: the “defendant”. Instead, say “I’m here for that matter”, and make your “paramount security interest holder declaration”.**

ASK to approach the judge in private as the paramount security interest holder in all property and collateral registered and unregistered to your government created legal/trust/NAME. You must be, and actually are, the creditor in public to help them set off any and all commercial presentments. Taxes, tickets, loans, court cases etc. etc. It’s all commercial. As the man — and not the fictional person — you can set off all debt privately.

When they bring you into the public, remove the presumption that you are the government created trust/debtor/NAME. Hold your private contract. You don’t need to prove anything. Ask them to prove that you’re not a man, which they cannot prove. Maxim, “He who has to prove something will lose”. Let the evidence speak for itself.

So privately ask for the original charging instrument with the government created NAME/TRUST/STRAWMAN on it. Then Accept it for Value (A4V it) or create a money order, or bond.

As long as you have a Birth Certificate and a Social Security Number, write the Strawman’s Name and Social Security Number on the instrument and send it (deliver it) to the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of the claim. YOU DON’T NEED TO DO A UCC-1 FINANCING STATEMENT ON YOUR BIRTH CERTIFICATE or your STRAWMAN NAME non-response.  All you need to do is establish a contract by tacit non-response.

Here is a post from Anthony, who similarly handled his case. It wasn’t SET OFF until he asked to move it into the PRIVATE.

“Anthony Cicalla Junior – I went into court and told the administrator (the judge) that “I am here in regards to the matter, but I do not understand the nature of the charges and I have questions before I enter a plea.” I fired the public “pretender” and told the administrator that “I am a living being over 18, and I am competent to handle my own affairs. I understand that these courts work on presumptions so I would like to correct some of them up front. One is, that you can’t issue a valid judgment without jurisdiction. Once subject matter jurisdiction is challenged it must be addressed.

So for and on the record, I am challenging subject matter jurisdiction. I also understand that all parties must be present and accurately identified before any proceedings can commence.

I am here today to confront my accuser and see who is here with sufficient pleadings to invoke the jurisdiction of this court.”

Once the prosecutor begins to speak, interrupt him.  “Excuse me, your honor.  I’ve never seen this man before in my life.” Turn to him and ask if he has a claim. When he says no, tell him he is fired.  He might say he is representing the state. “Your honor, I don’t .know what imaginary friend he has, but I don’t see anyone else over there.

All parties must be present and accurately identified before any proceedings can commence. Also, statements of counsel are not facts before the court, because it’s “hearsay”. Court would be involved in fraud by allowing hearsay in the record. Then when I accepted the case and returned it for closure, he threatened me with contempt. I asked him why he would threaten me with contempt for doing what I needed to do to remain in honor. I then offered that we move the case to private and the administrator jumped on it. The prosecutor did not speak in chambers after he was fired.

I did this in court; I was threatened with contempt; my case was moved to private.  It was then set off.


Ask WHICH “State of Texas” and for the “ACT of Congress” which created that State. That’ll shut them up since only the FIRST State Constitution was approved by Congress as a state of the Union. All the subsequent State Constitutions are PRIVATE.

I.e. if you don’t contract with them they have no authority over you. So if they ID the STATE with the SECOND or later State Constitution, then you can ask them where’s the contract, since those Constitutions are PRIVATE, since they DID NOT create a State of the Union.

If either the prosecutor or the judge REFUSES to identify the STATE by its founding Charter (UPON REQUEST), then THERE IS NO CASE because you can’t have a case WITHOUT a charging party!!!

**The “paramount security interest holder declaration” goes like this:

“I am the paramount security interest holder in all property and collateral, both registered and unregistered, belonging to the defendant JARO HENRY SMITH. Does anyone here have a claim against me?”

The FIRST lien holder has a SUPERIOR claim to ANY other creditor, so until his claim is satisfied, no one else gets paid. And a person with the paramount security interest IS the first lien holder.


And here is a short video about this: 




About David Robinson

REVISED: David Robinson is an Author and Journalist living in the mid-coast area of Maine. He is a Graduate and Alumni of the Brunswick Police Academy. He served as a JUROR seated on the Cumberland County, Maine, Grand Jury for the first four-month session of 2014. Publisher Robinson served 3 months of a 4-month sentence for Conspiracy to defraud the United States, at the FCI Berlin minimum security Satellite Camp in Berlin New Hampshire, as retaliation after he and a friend sued the IRS, unsuccessfully, for Unfair Trade Practices, under Title 15 of the US Code. +++ Maine Lawsuit Against The IRS: For Unfair Trade Practices ( +++ Failure to File & Conspiracy: United States vs. Messier & Robinson - No. 2:14-cr-00083-DBH ( +++ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District Court of Maine / REPLY BRIEF OF ROBINSON ( +++ Books by David E. Robinson (
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s